3/4th or Sideview: Opinions?

For a while I've been wanting to make an exploration game with a heavy aesthetic. Problem is, the only thing I'm particularly good at pixelling are items and I'm bad at perspective.

While drawing map ideas it hit me, if I made this side-view, I'd be able to give a much better visual representation of the areas, it'd plain look better, and I could really go to town on the character sprites.
However, making it a side-scroller feels like it would pretty much floor the whole 'exploration' aspect, and it just doesn't seem as engaging.
I've played some game where it worked rather well (for example both Valykrie Profiles, and Wild ARMs 4 also shifted into side-view sometimes) - and while I enjoyed all these games immensely as they were, and the style was a breath of fresh air, at no point did I think this was better.

So! Though this had gotten all rather long-winded, basically I'd like to know if you guys think sideview would be adequate or if top-down is the only way to go.

I think that side-view destroys the "Open-World" aspect.Like,every map has only two exits,one to go back,and the other to go to the next area.Side-view gameplay is best suited for Beat-'em-all games and arcade.So I say Top-Down.

Hmmm, well, I think it's really up to you and the game you want to create. But I believe in your intro you said you really like exploration, so it would seem to me to make sense to add that element in.

There are tutorials here on drawing pixel art to fit in RM, and if you have a foundation for pixel art, I'm sure with practice you will be just fine. Heck, I never considered myself any kind of artist, but with a lot effort and practice, I've gotten much better at it.

Also, there is a huge trove of free to use resources created by other members here to get you started.

If you didn't prefer the side-view style as a player, why would you use it in a game as a developer, aside from "It's easier for me"? 

I don't think that's a good reason to do something that fundamental in a game.  It's a good reason to say "I won't add this optional gameplay feature" (such as crafting, or multiple plot branches, perhaps), but the appearance of the game IS the entire world in the player's mind.

Now, yes, as RPG players, we know what we see are merely representations, but you want a good representation that supports and enriches your world, not one that causes players to go "Huh?"

In my case, if I saw an RPG which used a side view for exploration, I probably wouldn't play it, because it would seem too weird to me.  Think Zelda II if you want to know how side view feels in an RPG.  Zelda II's style wasn't replicated in ANY other Zelda game, so that should tell you how well players like it.

If you can already do pixel art, that should be a good, solid foundation to start from.

Now, since I have no foundation in pixel art, I personally would just use the stock RTP resources, or from one of the Resource Packs, or use the Game Character Hub to create what I needed. 

Well, you'd still be able to interact with the background, so there wouldn't necessarily only be the two exits. I understand everything else you mentioned, though. It certianly would make it feel much more restrictive.

With this game specfically I really want to create a detailed world. It's odd, but I really like games that have you rifle around for story progression and everything has flavour text, as you end up really getting a feel for the world, rather than it just being a backdrop for more bapping monsters around the head.

I guess I'm really torn between whether I want to focus on the whole 'look-at-everything', or the atmosphere and visual representation of the world.

It's more like I don't have a strong opinion either way, rather than prefering one over the other.  Rather than easier, I'm more thinking 'I can convey the world better' (see above).

I tend to enjoy a game matter what, so I don't feel my judgement is entirely sound, but I feel like it worked perfectly fine in games like Valkyrie Profile... but then I get war flashbacks of the first ~40 hours of Final Fantasy 13.

I guess there's only one thing for it... fight create the same map in both styles and see what happens.

It all depends on the implementation. "Dust: An elusian Tale" Is a great RPG/battle side-view for example. I wouldn't call it 'easy'. It's just... different. You can hack and slash Zelda-syle top-down or Dust-style side-view. They both work and they both seem to do well.

Sounds like you're using top down to describe the typical RPG veiw, which isn't true.  Top down is usually for things like scrolling shooters, rougelikes, a few strategy games, stuff like that.  This style is usually used in games where there will be a lot of levels, the location is the star of the show and the characters are so unimportant that you can't see any more than the top of their head.  The only RPG games I can think of that come close to this style is the Gauntlet series.

3/4ths view is the typical RPG view.  This is better if you want a better look at your world and characters, but still gives you a far enough back look at them both to give room for exploration.  It's well suited for the type of gameplay you have in most RPGs.

Sidescrollers are for when you want a zoomed in view of everything.  Details are much more important but if you're going to have much exploration your player will get lost much easier.  This view is usually used for action games where a good view of the character performing all those interesting moves is more important than knowing where you are and where you're going.  There are a few RPGs in this view, but they're all Metroidvania action/platformer blends.

The thing you need to decide first is exactly what sort of gameplay you're trying for, that will decide a lot of other elements, not just the drawing style.

The Mario games, Castlevania, Tales of XXX series, that Valkyrie game, there's lots of side-style RPGs that tend to incorporate some measure of action platforming because it fits with the side-view.  Heck, Half-minute Hero is sort of an RPG of its own.  Rather than just going for side-scroll to make it pretty, think of what else you can do with the side-scroller to enhance the RPG aspects.

Ahh my bad, I couldn't think of the correct term earlier. I'll fix it.

The original concept is a non-combat (though I'm positive now that it won't stay like that) adventure game. but at the moment I'm really just trying to get my ideas down before I forget them because it's too ambitious to be my first project arty game ahoy

This is pretty much what's stopping me. That and now that I've thought it over, there'll be action battles (sorry I'm failing at correct terms again, it's late) which always seems a bit messy in 3/4 style to me.

My personal feeling is that 3/4 view tends to be the better view for RPGs.  However, "2 1/2 Dimensional" games can make very effective use of the side-scrolling view and parallax effects.  It can be really beautiful.  But I think it would make it tough to build exploration as a main theme.

FFT 3/4 for isometric view otherwise rotating 3d would be nice. 2d is okay as long as you can do it right. I just hate the default view at least add the characters and heroes.